9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 56 of the Act of Rs. 34,95,154/- on account of locker rent on presumption basis. 3. The fact in brief is that assessee has filed return of income declaring total income at Rs. 7,15,35,980/- on 19.11.2014. The case was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice under Section 143(2) was issued on 28.08.2015. During the course of assessment the AO notice that assessee has obtained deposit amounting to Rs. 4,23,65,550/- from the customers against the allotment of safe deposit vaults (lockers). The Ld. AO was of the view that other Co-operative Banks was charging rent for the locker and the same was offered for taxation. However, the assessee has not charged rent for the locker and also not given detail of interest earned on deposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of balance sheet placed in the Paper Book it is noticed that assessee has shown the amount of safe vault deposit of Rs. 4,23,05,500/- in the liabilities side under the head deposits claiming that same was invested in working capital of bank for providing loans and making investments. It is also submitted that interest income from loan and investment was reflected in the Profit and Loss Account and Income Tax Return was filed as per profit shown in the Profit and Loss Account. The Ld. Counsel has also placed reliance was on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT in the case of Co-op. Bank of Mehsana Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1261/Ahd/2017 for A.Y. 2014-15 wherein the similar issue on identical facts has been adjudicated in favour o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing locker rent on notional basis therefore, we are not inclined with the decision of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed." 6. After considering the aforesaid decision of the Coordinate Bench there is nothing before us on hand different from the issue raised in the case cited (supra), so as to take a different view on this issue. Therefore, since the issue on hand being squarely covered following the principle of consistency we find merit in the submission of the assessee and allow the appeal of the assessee as charging of notional interest is not justified. 7. The Ld. Counsel has not pressed the additional ground for fresh claims of Rs. 7,33,312/- made during assessment proceedings. Accordingly, this ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
